Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
Of course dozens of columns were compromised. Here's a picture:
|
I was talking about the core, which were largely uncompromised, at least not enough to explain full-body global collapse.
External columns were obviously breached and severed. Just not enough to explain such immense failure throughout the building.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
Again, the supports holding the floor in place - between what was left of the outer shell and the inner core fell. It fell down at least one story with the force of 300 tons. It took out the floor below it, and the floor below that.
The videos you showed (which surprised me really) seem to be more of the support of the building failing, which caused it the building to lean. In this case, the supports were still in place, but the floors were no longer attached to it. The floors fell down on each other, and continued to fall taking out other floors until it started to pull the entire structure with it.
|
The floor supports couldn't have all failed at once without some external agent - 75% of the building and more depending on which were structurally intact when the top-part/pile-driver started its descent. It's simple physics that the smaller part coming down - even if it was lifted a hundred feet in the air and then dropped - couldn't have demolished the structurally sound lower portion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
You've mentioned this before and I'm not sure why. Your saying that the buildings fell straight down, but 20 ton pieces were flung 600 feet away? Which is it?
|
That's the whole point. The NIST report tries to explain WTC7 by saying that large chunks of the towers were flung out to smash into it but they never explain why those parts were able to travel so far and so fast. They also never explain the speed (they finally admitted to free fall for over 2 seconds because a high school physics teacher challenged one of their initial reports) or perfect symmetry of the WTC7 "collapse".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
You need to understand the size of the towers. They were 210 feet wide - each side. When the towers fell, they took up more than 200 feet by 200 feet at the base. The towers went down hundreds of feet taking out a subway station, parking, and shopping centers, and also went out too. Millions of tons of concrete fell, and it should come as no surprise that it fell 600 feet away. Just think about the amount of force those tons of steel and concrete and what not fell.... An entire city block was destroyed - a huge city block.
|
If there had been any tipping that would have made sense. There wasn't. Gravity can't allocate any reason for lateral dispersion of 20-tonne pieces. According to the videos these things flew upand out, and there weren't any structural supports following or tipping behind them to explain how the parts were lead there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
A slab of concrete weighing 300 tons was suspended between the outer shell and the inner core. It fell, and when it fell it fell an entire story - what's that, fourteen feet? More? - and slammed into another 300 ton floor. Your looking at the floor below it as something that should stop the falling, but it didn't. The joints were meant to support 300 tons, not 300 tons and another 300 tons falling on top of it. Now 600 tons of steel and concrete are falling onto another floor. Your thinking it should have met with resistance at each floor, but the truth is none of the floors had any hope of holding this for even a fraction of a second and it quickly picked up momentum because it was picking up mass and weight.
|
You have to zoom out a little in that observation - the 300 ton flloor isn't falling on a single floor - it's not a 50/50 equation. Some demolitions use this especially with concrete based buildings - cut out the middle section so the top half "falls" and crushes the lower half - but they don't do that with steel because of the rigidity of steel-frame building constuction.
Your 300 ton floor is falling on a construct of steel bracing made to withstand itself as well as support the upper third of the building (or quarter or what have you) let alone a single 300 ton floor.
You're also supposing that all support for the flloor gave out at once, which is outrageous unless they were made to fail via something like explosives.
On top of this, there were no concrete slabs remaining - the concrete was pulverized to dust. There are links and photos for panacake collapses and those always show stacks of the sort that didn't occur with the towers - and physics tell us that the flloors would not have been pulverized.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
You also mentioned how quickly the towers fell. Did they really fall that fast?
On this video, we can see the tower started to collapse at the fourteen second mark. However, that's only what we can see. We can't what was happening inside of the building; We can't see see if entire floors fell before that mark.
|
Even if they fell in 20 seconds (each!) the falls would have been suspicious.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
Seems there was a lot the movie failed to mention. I don't read about 9/11 as much, but I've read the 9/11 Commission Report, Debunking 9/11, and Debunking Dubunking 9/11. When this happened in 2001 I believe it at face value, and while I've read all about the 9/11 conspiracy theories, I have yet to find anything that changes my opinion of what happened that day. We can debate how the towers fell until we are blue in the face but the truth is we'll never know.
|
I do hope some disclosure will eventually give us the truth about the WTC buildings. Have you read any of the material put out by David Griffin or the summary of the paper by Neils Harrit regarding the WTC dust?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
There are too many holes in the conspiracy theories. Why would they have used airplanes at all - why not bomb them? If the airplanes were remote controlled from the ground, what happened to flight 93 in Shanksville? What happened to all of those people who got on those airplanes?
|
Don't you find holes in the official version?!? It rings like a conspiracy theory in and of itself... and in fact any conspiracy "theory" is just a theory which means there will be unverifiable "holes" - which is why I prefer questions and facts. Stuff like the cell phone debunking (which can be explained if the supposed hijackers had a cellular transmitter in their luggage for example) and no-plane theories at the Pentagon are as much hot air as the official theory. Questions remain.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
I do believe our government lies to us. You know JFK wasn't shot by a magical fucking bullet, and you know that Israel knowingly attacked a US Navy ship during the Six Day War. But I don't think they could lie about this. But I think there is a huge difference between telling a lie after the fact and intentionally causing an incident. In other words, Oswald set out to kill JFK but it was the Secret Service who shot and killed him. (In short... The Secret Service was heavily armed with sub machine guns, Oswald takes a pot shot, everyone grabs their weapons, and opps JFK was shot from behind.) The Secret Service didn't plan on killing JFK - it was an accident - but they covered it up by altering a few facts. Here with 9/11 the conspiracy theories say that this was intentionally done by the US Government as a pretext to build a pipeline in Afghanistan that still hasn't been built. But there is way too many things they would have to cover up and hide to pull this off.
|
That's an interesting theory for the JFK thing. It took the service years to admit that Oswald was on their payroll, and it wasn't until the 70s that the government was forced to admit there was a second shooter that day in Texas (thus completely discrediting the Warren commission report), but I've never heard or considered the oopsie-daisy version.
But similarly the 9/11 commission refused to take much testimony into account and seemed to only publish or conclude things that supported their theory rather than follow up on things like reports of pre-impact explosions, "hijacker" connections to the FBI, Saudi connections and the money trail, among so many other things...
:D